<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>2004 (5) TMI 68 - Supreme Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=46964</link>
    <description>Tariff classification of the products turned on commercial parlance, composition, user perception, and prior departmental treatment. The Court held that the presence of pharmaceutical or antiseptic ingredients does not by itself make a product cosmetic; where the goods are commonly understood and treated as medicinal preparations, that character prevails. It also applied the principle that HSN-based entries should ordinarily be construed consistently with internationally accepted nomenclature unless the tariff indicates otherwise. On the facts, the products had been treated as medicinal preparations by the department and other authorities, so the classification as cosmetics could not stand and the assessee&#039;s classification was accepted.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 05 May 2004 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 30 Jan 2020 11:50:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=85484" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2004 (5) TMI 68 - Supreme Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=46964</link>
      <description>Tariff classification of the products turned on commercial parlance, composition, user perception, and prior departmental treatment. The Court held that the presence of pharmaceutical or antiseptic ingredients does not by itself make a product cosmetic; where the goods are commonly understood and treated as medicinal preparations, that character prevails. It also applied the principle that HSN-based entries should ordinarily be construed consistently with internationally accepted nomenclature unless the tariff indicates otherwise. On the facts, the products had been treated as medicinal preparations by the department and other authorities, so the classification as cosmetics could not stand and the assessee&#039;s classification was accepted.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 05 May 2004 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=46964</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>